Envy Nickel Trading Fraud Victims' Petition to PM Wong

Date:   3rd Feb 2025

To:       Prime Minister’s Office   

Re:      ENVY Nickel-Trading Financial Scam by Ng Yu Zhi  

Dear Prime Minister Wong,

Congratulations on your appointment as our Prime Minister! As the new year ushered in, we pray that with your leadership, Singapore will continue to be not only a safe place physically, but also a secure financial hub, ensuring the protection of citizens from locally created frauds.  

We are a group of victims of ENVY Nickel-Trading Financial scam, which is said to be Singapore’s largest alleged fraud. In light of the profound impact this fraud has had on our lives, we submitted a Petition Letter to PM Lee, MOHA, MAS, and CAD on 29th November 2023. A copy has also been sent to your email address. As CNY 2025 marks four years since Ng Yu Zhi and his team were investigated in February 2021, we feel it is crucial that we raise this matter with your office again. We seek your involvement to ensure that we have a conclusion in 2025.  

Over the past four years, we have witnessed how the CAD acted with remarkable speed in apprehending individuals involved in Singapore’s largest money laundering case. We are left questioning the stark contrast in how the CAD handled these two cases. Why has the Envy saga been allowed to drag on, leaving countless families to suffer the devastating consequences of financial losses amounting to S$1.5 billion? This represents many people’s years of hard labor in accumulating these funds. Yet, we, the Envy victims, continue to exercise patience and suffer quietly from the loss and enduring financial, emotional, and psychological strain. Deep down, we are yearning for the Singapore judicial system to deliver the justice that is long overdue.  

Often, the Envy victims were told that our recovery would be like that of the Sunshine Empire case, which was investigated back in 2009. The convicted founder served his sentence, but victims saw no recovery of their losses. We can’t help but compare this to the swift actions of the US SEC in the FTX case. The SEC acted quickly, arresting Sam Bankman-Fried and his team, and set up a claim portal to assist victims in their recovery. Prior to FTX, the SEC also took decisive action in the Madoff fraud, which collapsed in December 2008, returning as much as 94% to date to Madoff’s 40,000 victims from 127 countries.  

As Singapore aspires to be a trusted financial hub, this is the kind of proactive approach our MAS should be emulating. The Envy fraud began in Singapore and spanned from 2016 to 2021. Yet, all MAS did was place Envy Asset Management Pte Ltd (EAM) on an Alert List in 2018/2019, essentially leaving investors to bear their own risks. The truth is, many investors are not aware of the MAS Alert List. Also, when MAS and the CAD finally recognised Envy as a potential fraud, why was Ng allowed to remain free and given so much time to stack away our monies? Why were he and his associates not immediately apprehended and held accountable? Can we, as a nation, tolerate this sluggish and negligent response to financial fraud, allowing key figures and enablers to escape justice while victims continue to suffer?  

We, the Envy victims, are law-abiding and tax paying citizens. We expect our trusted government to take protective actions, be it to ban or stop questionable investment schemes decisively. And when frauds happen, MAS must have the ability to do as the SEC of USA does.  

In our 1st Petition Letter, we have raised many points of concerns as follow:  

• Ng was on bail instead of being apprehended and was said to be maintaining a lavish lifestyle, even though his bank accounts were frozen.

In response to our Petition Letter to PM Lee, the CAD replied to inform that Ng Yu Zhi was remanded as of 24 February 2024. There was no explanation as to how he could still afford to pay for S$20,000/mth rental before that. And we believe the CAD is not aware that Ng has made requests through his crony to borrow money from the investors group to pay for his bail. Of the SGD 834M scammed, Ng was found to have taken SGD 455M of which only SGD 180M is recoverable, subject to recovery of assets located mainly in China under 3rd parties.

In KPMG’s update to victims, we were informed that Ng offered to make a 25% restitution of SGD 455M he took. But KPMG has rejected it. We don’t know how Ng’s restitution could help mitigate his alleged charges and how the CAD and KPMG work together. Everything was opaque. We have no visibility of the full details.

• His partner and associates took around S$100M, some of which were re-invested into Envy. Many have refused to make restitution when approached by the Court-appointed Liquidator despite knowing that the whole Envy Nickel investment is a fraud now.

If the Court-appointed Liquidator has the authority, this would not happen. One question: since they are Court-appointed, then shouldn’t the State pay them?

• We believe the local banks - UOB, OCBC and DBS have significant roles in facilitating Envy’s operation. How are they held accountable in this fraud? Have they made Suspicious Transaction Reports to MAS when Ng was found to have made 200 transfers out of his bank account.

OCBC was said to have sent letters of clarifications to some investors but did not give any reply when they were asked for the reasons of their queries.

UOB closed the bank accounts of Envy companies and staff’s personal accounts. DBS certainly would have seen the many STRs conducted by Ng and Envy Accounts department. How can the banks not be held responsible in some ways? Particularly DBS, because DBS readily agreed to let Envy Global Trading Pte Ltd (EGT) open an account and transact, this greatly enhanced our confidence in EGT. Why didn’t MAS alert all banks of their suspicions when they issued the warning Alert against EAM?

• Understand that Envy and staff have paid large amounts in income tax. Upon confirming that this is a fraud, will monies be returned like the Madoff case?    

For Madoff’s case to recover 94%, we would think that tax monies must have been recovered. How should Singapore IRAS respond to this? No one, including, institutions should be enriched.

• The approach taken by our judicial system is to go after Ng for his criminal acts and appointed Liquidators to recover our investment money while charging us exorbitant fees.

Sadly, the Court-appointed Liquidator, KPMG, has made little progress in the recovery of the over S$1.5B fraud since their appointment. Whatever that is now in custody of the Court was what the CAD froze at the beginning of the investigation (it was said to be only S$56M). All the recovery work conducted by KPMG and SLB are charged back to Envy victims. Their bills have accumulated to over S$10M, with their rates ranging from S$300/hr to S$2,500/hr. We strongly believe that a fraud recovery should not be handled by a commercial entity since no one is to be enriched.    

• Many of us have relied on MAS’s endorsement of Envysion Wealth Management Pte Ltd as they comprised of a team of banking professionals with over 100 years of investment experience. 

We think that MAS should take on the lead role in the recovery of fraud monies.   

At this point, we want to raise two things that came to our attention:  

1)    Involving David Ju Xiao   In Dec 2022, KPMG informed investors that they were entering into a settlement with Envy’s Director David Ju Xiao (DJX: NRIC No. S8777729D) for US$1.3M by March 2023 and he was to dispose his assets and he was to procure YMMD to deliver to KPMG and CAD for the seizure promised to KPMG to YMMD shall not contest the seizure or subsequent disposal by the CAD of the sum of USD 9,329,040 (and all interest accrued thereupon) originally paid by the 3rd Plaintiff pursuant to a Contract of Purchase.  

(a) YMMD shall not contest the seizure or subsequent disposal by the CAD of the sum of USD 9,329,040 (and all interest accrued thereupon) originally paid by the 3rd Plaintiff pursuant to a Contract of Purchase (YM2021-001S) dated 10 February 2021.  

(b) YMMD shall not contest the seizure or subsequent disposal by the CAD of the sum of SGD 32,100 (and all interest accrued thereupon) originally paid by the 3rd Plaintiff pursuant to a Debit Note (D0001-2021) dated 4 January 2021.   

c) Should, for whatsoever reason, the State Courts decide on a disposal application by the CAD that the abovementioned sums be disposed to YMMD, YMMD shall recognize the 3rd Plaintiff as the beneficial owner and return the abovementioned sums (and all interest accrued thereupon) to the 4th to 6th Plaintiffs i.e. the 3rd Plaintiff’s liquidators.  

Yet, we were later informed that he withdrew this offer. We are perplexed as to why DJX was allowed to do so. He must have taken legal advice on this matter. Why is our Court-appointed Liquidator not able to do anything? If our system poses any constraint, then perhaps it is time to review and revise.  

2)    Rhiya Lee   Besides DJX, from KPMG’s report, we learned that Rhiya Lee Shi Yee has taken S$23M in remuneration and/or gains. Yet, she has not been charged like Ng, and there has been no report from the Liquidator regarding her cooperation in returning the monies taken from Envy. If Envy is a fraud, and the Court has ruled that no one should be enriched as a matter of public policy - disregarding the principle of contract law - then we should look to the Madoff case to see how the SEC acted. How could someone who supported Ng as an alternative signatory from the start of EAM claim innocence in her involvement in this massive fraud involving S$1.5B?  

If the above two individuals only face civil suits and not criminal charges, unlike FTX’s co-founder and key staff, then we believe this creates an environment where people can shirk responsibility, leaving just one person to bear the full blame. Surely, a fraud involving S$1.5B and operating for more than five years couldn’t happen with only one person found guilty.    

A Call for Justice and Financial Restitution  

After 48 months of waiting, we are still in the dark about when this ordeal will finally conclude. While Ng faces over 100 charges from the Attorney General’s Chamber, and the CAD focuses on his prosecution, we question what proactive measures MAS is taking to support the Court-appointed Liquidator in maximizing recovery for victims.  

While we firmly support Ng’s prosecution, our primary concern remains in the recovery of our investments. The current liquidation process incurs substantial costs, with much of the recovered funds being diverted to Liquidator fees instead of returning to victims. This is unacceptable. We urge MAS to intervene with greater oversight to ensure the liquidation process prioritizes victim compensation over excessive administrative costs.  

Key Requests to Authorities

1. Immediate Incarceration and Stronger Sentencing  

Ng’s detention since February 2024 is a start, but swift prosecution and a severe sentence are necessary to send a clear message against financial fraud.

• The impact on victims has been profound - lives lost, families destroyed, and many are now suffering from anxiety and depression.
• Ng’s actions didn’t just take money; he stole futures, and the damages are irreparable. A life sentence is needed to reflect the scale of the harm caused and to deter future frauds.  

2. Collaborative Efforts for Victim Recovery

We strongly urge MAS and MOL to collaborate, following the example of the SEC and Department of Justice during the Madoff Ponzi scheme, which led to a 94% recovery of victims’ funds.

• Ng’s conviction should include restitution as part of the sentencing process. This must not be left solely to a Court-appointed Liquidator, where victims bear the cost of commercial claims.
• We advocate for a government-led recovery mechanism to ensure fairness, efficiency, and transparency, providing direct financial redress to victims.  

3. International Cooperation for Asset Recovery

Given that the funds were transferred internationally, we call for active government intervention in engaging relevant foreign authorities to recover assets.

• Which body - MAS, MOL, or the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) - should take the lead in coordinating international recovery efforts?
• Without strong international cooperation, victims risk losing their funds to legal complexities beyond Singapore’s jurisdiction.  

4. Victim Support Framework

There is currently only one self-initiated victim support group, which has been insufficient.

• We request the authorities to establish a dedicated victim support framework to provide timely updates on the investigation and liquidation process.
• This framework should include financial, legal, and emotional assistance to help victims navigate this prolonged and difficult process.  

5. Regulatory Reforms

We urge urgent regulatory reforms to strengthen investor protection and prevent such frauds in the future.

• Banks and financial institutions that supported Envy companies must be held accountable for failing to submit Suspicious Transaction Reports (STRs) on time.
• As law-abiding taxpayers, most victims trusted Singapore’s financial system. It is imperative that MAS and MOL implement stronger safeguards to prevent such incidents from recurring.  

Conclusion: A Call for Swift Action  

Regrettably, many marriages, relationships, careers, and businesses have been negatively impacted by this scam. This fraud has affected more than 2,000 families. The emotional and psychological toll on victims has been immeasurable. We seek justice, closure, and the restoration of our hard-earned savings and retirement funds.  

While Ng has been remanded since February 2024, this alone is not enough. We urge the authorities to ensure swift prosecution, conviction, and financial restitution. Justice must go beyond detention—it must restore trust in Singapore’s financial and judicial systems.  

We implore the authorities to take decisive action to deliver justice and ensure that such financial crimes do not happen again.  

Yours sincerely,      

Envy’s Nickel Trading Victims

Investors.egt@gmail.com    Contact the author of the petition